Apartment Buildings On Mt. Prospect Hit List

The Mt. Prospect Village Board has narrowly approved an ordinance that would retroactively eliminate apartment buildings that have been illegally located in residential areas.

"This is not necessarily the end of it," said Mayor Gerald Farley, who cast the tie-breaking vote in the 4-3 decision. "We can amend the ordinance if we find it isn't doing what we intended it to do. It's not intended to punish anyone. It's attempting to preserve the character of the neighborhood."

Under the ordinance approved this week, the village will crack down on buildings that have been operated illegally as apartments in single-family neighborhoods during the last 50 years, requiring that they be converted to single-family use by Jan. 1, 2000.

The ordinance grandfathers buildings built for apartments or homes converted to apartments in single-family neighborhoods before May 2, 1944. Before that date, Mt. Prospect had only two zoning classifications-residential and industrial-and apartment buildings were legally built alongside single-family homes.

Apartment buildings built in such neighborhoods after that date, or single-family homes converted to apartment buildings, are already illegal under village ordinance. But in years past it appears there was lax enforcement of the law.

The five-year grace period to covert their buildings provides property owners with a chance to recoup some of their investment. Building owners who have invested money in their property in the last 10 years and need more time to recover that investment may apply for an extension of that amortization period.

The ordinance also allows for what are commonly known as "in-law" apartments, separate living units in the home created for a family member.

The full impact of the ordinance is not certain. According to village staff, there is no accurate count of the number of legitimate apartment buildings and illegally converted homes that are located in single-family districts.

During the last six weeks, several property owners, tenants and trustees have come out against the ordinance. Among the harshest critics has been Trustee Irvana Wilks, who along with Trustees Richard Hendricks and George Clowes cast dissenting votes.

Problems cited by critics include the difficulty in proving when a particular house was converted to a two-flat if it has not belonged to the same person the last 50 years and the hardship for people who bought these buildings as income property and rely on the extra revenue they get from the rents.